The Politics of Tourism Development, a case of dual governance in Tobago
Michelle McLeod * School of Services Management Bournemouth University Talbot Campus, Fern Barrow Poole, Dorset BH12 5BB United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)1202 965387 Fax: +44 (0)1202 515707 E-mail: [email protected] * Corresponding author David Airey Faculty of Management and Law, University of Surrey Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)1483 689656 Fax: +44 (0)1483 686301 E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to report on an exploratory study of the role that tourism policy plays in influencing tourism development. The research is based on two questions, how does tourism policy influence tourism development in the small twin island state of Trinidad and Tobago; and how does an arrangement of dual governance in a small twin-island state promote tourism development? The exploration demonstrates that tourism development in the context of Tobago, the smaller of the two islands, has been slowed as a result of dual governance and hence dual policy arrangement. Keywords: Trinidad and Tobago; Tobago House of Assembly; tourism policy; tourism development; politics and governance; public policy; twin-island state; Caribbean tourism. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: McLeod, M. and Airey, D. (200x) ‘The Politics of Tourism Development, a case of dual governance in Tobago’, Int. J. Tourism Policy,
1
Biographical notes: Michelle McLeod is a postgraduate research student at Bournemouth University. Her research interests include tourism policy, tourism development, governance, tourism networks and knowledge management. David Airey is Pro-Vice-Chancellor and Professor of Tourism Management at the University of Surrey. He has been involved in tourism education and research for 35 years working in academia, with government and with the European Commission. He has particular interest in tourism education, tourism policy and organisation and tourism economics.
1 Introduction
This paper presents an exploration of the influence of the
government’s tourism policy on the development of tourism in the
small island of Tobago within the twin-island state of Trinidad and
Tobago. The study particularly looks at how Tobago’s tourism
industry has developed through a dual governance arrangement with
a central government based in Trinidad coupled with the Tobago
House of Assembly (THA), a body corporate, governing Tobago.
Tourism policy may be viewed as an outcome of political forces
designed to bring about certain changes in the tourism destination.
Bearing this in mind, a dual governance arrangement effectively
means that tourism policy formulation and implementation is an
activity of two governments seeking to influence tourism
development. As a result, based on a framework of dual governance,
2
the influences on tourism development potentially leads to conflict
rather than collaboration, particularly if the two governments are of
differing ideological positions. In such an environment the
development of the tourism industry is likely to be constrained.
The discussion of dual governance is important and relevant to our
knowledge of the politics of tourism development. The paper begins
by presenting a literature review of public policy, tourism policy and
its links to tourism development and provides the foundation for
examining the research questions. The research study examines
tourism development and seeks an explanation for tourism policy
influencing tourism development by using a case study approach.
The island of Tobago which is the smaller island within the twin-
island state was selected since it provides an opportunity to examine
the workings of central and local government in developing a tourism
industry. Interview data were collected and analysed by abstracting
core thematic content. The main finding is that tourism policy that is
made in a framework of dual governance does not permit the most
effective development of tourism. Based on this, a recommendation
is made for a divergence of tourism policy within a framework of
two governments. Divergence of tourism policy means separate
3
tourism formulation and implementation activity by the respective
governments of each island.
2 Literature Review
Public policy determination is not an exact science and is spread
across several government institutions (Hall 1994; Hall and Jenkins
1995; Pearce 1996; Church et al, 2000; Tyler and Dinan 2001; Kerr
2003). According to Kerr (2003) public policy determination is the
focal point of government activity. The activity of public policy
comes from a multiplicity of interests and is based on achieving
specified objectives, which are representative of value choices (Hall
and Jenkins 1995). These choices are made by government
depending on the political, economic and constitutional system (Mill
and Morrison 1985) and ideological preferences (Matthews and
Ritcher 1991). Cooper et al (1998) argue that public policy relating
to tourism depends on the significance of the tourism industry to a
country’s economy. Chambers and Airey (2001:117) examine the
role of public policy with a study of the impact of two divergent
governmental public policy positions on the development of tourism
on the island of Jamaica. As such, differing ideological positions,
one based on socialist views and the other on capitalism affected the
4
rate of tourism development on the island. They suggest that ‘tourism
public policies are strongly influenced by the ideological thrust of the
governing political parties.’ Generally, public policy cannot be
separated from party politics (Hall and Jenkins 1995). In other
words, a relationship exists among the concepts of ideology, public
policy, tourism policy and tourism development.
Ritchie and Crouch (2003:148) define tourism policy as,
‘a set of regulations, rules, guidelines, directives and
development/promotion objectives and strategies that provide a
framework within which the collective and individual decisions
directly affecting tourism development and the daily activities
within a destination are taken.’
Jenkins (1991) argues for a framework of tourism policy to facilitate
tourism development. Such a framework outlines whether the driver
of tourism is the public or private sector, the focus is international or
domestic tourism, the scale of tourism development and whether
integrated or enclave tourism. For instance, if the guideline is one of
community-based tourism, then small tourist establishments owned
by locals will be encouraged. As opposed to this, resort-based
5
tourism may mean that enclave properties, which are largely foreign
owned emerge, (Pearce 1989; Sharpley and Telfer 2002). Tourism
policy will inevitably influence tourism development through a
process. Hall (1994) argues that the tourism policy process is based
on the type of government, its political will to develop tourism, the
structure of tourism organizations and the stage of the development
of the tourism industry. Dredge and Jenkins (2003a:386) concur with
Hall’s (1994) idea that there are forces which influence the policy
process and argue that ‘globalizing forces have also had significant
impacts on tourism policy-making.’ For example, Curtin and Busby
(1999) examine the influence of international tour operators. The
complexity of interests has resulted in a search for clarity on issues
relating to tourism public policy. Nonetheless, tourism development
is the result of a framework of tourism policies formulated through
stakeholder buy-in (Edgell, 1999; Bramwell and Sharman 1999;
Sautter and Leisen 1999).
The role of government is critical in managing the public policy
process. Kerr (2003) argues that industry cannot survive without
government since government has the necessary legitimate power to
provide the political stability, social infrastructure, security, and the
legal and financial framework to smooth the progress and
6
development of tourism. Based on the complexity of interests in the
policy process and the need for governmental control, it is
understood that the institutional framework to formulate and
implement tourism policy is a significant part of the tourism
development process. It is perhaps the complexity of the policy
process, which has resulted in the emergence of local collaborative
policy making (Bramwell and Sharman 1999). In addition, another
level of government is sometimes necessary when national
government does not allocate more of the scarce resources to a
particular locality (Richter 1985). On the other hand, there are
challenges with creating another level of government. Dredge and
Jenkins (2003b:415) highlight this in the case of tourism in Australia,
‘overlapping jurisdictions, multiple accountabilities and
countervailing power are generally seen to impede effective tourism
policy making.’ Thus, a clearly defined tourism institutional
framework with stated roles and responsibilities for formulating and
implementing tourism policy (Jordan, 2007) is a requirement for
tourism development. Once the institutional framework is devised
then formulated tourism policies can be implemented. One such
specific tourism policy relates to planning for tourism development.
The economic, socio-cultural and environmental impacts of tourism
development necessitate planning (Gunn 1988; Hall 2000).
7
Additionally, tourism policy formulation and implementation may
also be influenced by a country’s geo-political framework. Weaver
(1998) and Jordan (2007) argue that within the context of a twin-
island state, core-periphery relationships can influence the present
state of affairs.
3 Tobago
Trinidad and Tobago is the southernmost country of the Caribbean
archipelago. Tobago is the smaller of the two islands in the twin-
island state of Trinidad and Tobago. Both islands were joined
politically in 1889 by Great Britain. After the country’s
independence in 1962, the governance of Tobago became the
responsibility of the Tobago House of Assembly in 1980. The
island’s terrain comprising 116 square miles is made up of several
hills and valleys with many natural bays and sandy deposits along the
coastline. In terms of tourism, Tobago has the potential to develop as
a successful tourism destination. As the winner of several eco-
tourism awards, the island’s rich green vegetation, coral reefs,
beaches and picturesque landscape are world renowned. In 2003,
Tobago received 67,240 stay-over visitors and 16,733 cruise visitors
(Department of Tourism, 2005). The majority of visitors came for
8
leisure purposes and stayed on average eight days. Average visitor
expenditure was US$530 in 2002 per visit. During that same period,
the number of accommodation rooms was 2,634. The Tobago
accommodation sector comprises largely small properties, though
there are five properties with more than 100 rooms. The main arm of
the THA which implements tourism policy on the island is the
Department of Tourism.
Figure 1 shows growth in tourist arrivals for over fifty years,
revealing an erratic pattern. There is evidence of strong growth over
the periods 1995 to 1998 and also 2002 to 2004. Butler’s (1980)
involvement stage aptly describes the present state of tourist
development in Tobago, although based on arrivals, the island has
approached the beginning of the development phase. There is largely
local involvement in the industry, including the Tobago Hilton, the
island’s international flagship hotel. A local-based pattern of
ownership in Trinidad and Tobago was previously noted by Weaver
(1998:300) as an outcome of a policy of nationalization. There are
several local tourism and hospitality associations, which participate
in tourism consultation processes and a tourism and hospitality
training institution was established in 1997.
9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 00 03
Year
Visitors
Visitors
Expon. (Visitors)
Sources: Weaver (1981) and Central Statistical Office (2005)
Note: Tobago specific data was not available for the period 1980 to 1992.
Figure 1. Tobago Visitor Arrivals (000) from 1946 to 2004
Figure 2 shows a comparative period of about 20 years of visitor
arrivals to three Caribbean countries. Both Barbados and St. Lucia
receive more visitors. The emergence of Tobago’s tourism industry is
evidenced by an increasing number of hotel projects putting it on a
similar development path to that of St. Lucia and Barbados but it is
still well behind these competitors in visitor numbers.
10
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Year
Arr
iva
ls (
00
0)
Barbados
St Lucia
Trinidad & Tobago
Tobago
Source: Caribbean Tourism Organization, 2005
Note: Tobago data only available from 1993.
Figure 2. Comparison of Caribbean Destinations Visitor Arrivals 1986 to 2004
Evidence suggests that attempts were made to formulate tourism
policy for Trinidad and Tobago, starting in 1988 by the Trinidad and
Tobago Tourism Development Authority (TDA), which is now
defunct. The overarching policy for tourism development at that
time as stated by the TDA (1988:4) was that tourism development
would focus on cultural heritage, natural resources and history and
not merely sea, sun and sand. Trinidad and Tobago also completed a
Tourism Master Plan in 1995, but more than ten years later, this
Master Plan, is still to be implemented and a written policy to be
devised.
11
Herein lies the role of the Tobago House of Assembly. The
establishment of the Tobago House of Assembly (THA) in 1980 may
be viewed as having been a milestone for the formulation and
implementation of a Tobago public policy, including tourism policy.
Nevertheless, it was only with the passing of the revised Tobago
House of Assembly Act, in 1996, that tourism policy formulation
obtained legal authority. The 1996 Act’s Fifth Schedule, Item Six
states that tourism is an area of the THA’s responsibility. Even given
legal authority there is still conflict. According to Weaver
(1998:302),
‘Since various Trinidad-based ministries and agencies will still
thus maintain some de facto and de jure influence over tourism
in Tobago, it appears as if the intended emergence of the THA
as the main policy body for Tobagonian tourism may
complicate rather than expedite the development of sector,
which has been plagued with a reputation for inadequate
physical planning or regulation.’
As indicated by Jordan (2004, 2007), despite the fact that the
constitution guarantees the existence of the Tobago House of
12
Assembly, central government dictates tourism policy for Tobago as
well as the size of budgetary allocations for the island, which it may
be argued will and has influenced the pace of tourism development.
The absence of consistent communication, cooperation, consultation
and collaboration further worsens the situation and has resulted in the
slow, sporadic growth of Tobago’s tourism industry. As stated by a
Trinidad and Tobago based British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)
Caribbean reporter Fraser (2005)
“Tobago was the heart of the twin-island republic's tourism
industry; yet, tourism policy and funding is controlled by the
central government in Trinidad. Where you have a Secretary
for tourism in Tobago, dictates still come from Trinidad with
regard to tourism policy and the funding of tourism
development so that’s one really crazy part of the
administration.”
Perhaps, the issue of dual governance is a cause of the state of
tourism development on the island of Tobago. As argued by Jordan
(2007:18),
13
‘It means that in effect, both the THA and the Central
Government have the authority to develop and implement
tourism policy for Tobago and undoubtedly, this has caused
many conflicts and misunderstandings to occur between
TIDCO, the Ministry of Tourism and the THA.’
4 Research Method
Two research questions were examined: how tourism policy
influences tourism development in the small twin-island state of
Trinidad and Tobago; and how an arrangement of dual governance in
a small twin-island state promotes tourism development. As a result
of the exploratory nature of the study interviews were utilized as the
prime source of data. Scott cites Burgess’s (Scott and Usher 1996)
three reasons for using interviewing as a main data collection
method. These reasons are access to past events, access to situations
at which the researcher was not present and access to situations
where permission was refused. Researchers have noted that there are
social activities outside the consciousnesses of individuals that make
the interview process not absolute. Nonetheless, Giddens cited in
Scott and Usher (1996) argues for interpretative research based on
14
the double hermeneutic framework. This hermeneutic framework
provides for reflectivity, which nullifies any discrepancy. Thereby a
balance occurs since interpretation of the social activity involves both
conceptual and perceptual means, making the process valid. The
interview method was also used since, as Clark et al (1998:132)
argue,
‘the interview as a form of research and a method of collecting
qualitative data is at its most useful when it gives us insight into
how individuals or groups think about their world, how they
construct the ‘reality’ of that world.’
The primary research involved a non-probability or convenience
sample of 26 face-to-face interviews since as Sekaran (2003:232)
argues,
‘the main advantage of face-to-face or direct interviews is that
the researcher can adapt the questions as necessary, clarify
doubts, and ensure that the responses are properly understood,
by repeating or rephrasing the questions.’
15
Interviewees included politicians and members of tourism boards,
hoteliers, ground tour operators, tourism advisors, research officers
and representatives of non-governmental organizations. Seventeen
were Tobago-based and 9 Trinidad-based, 18 were from large
organisations and 8 from small organisations. The majority of
respondents, 15, were from the public sector. The mix of
interviewees from different sectors, different sized organizations and
from the different islands contributed to concurrent and sampling
validity, reliability and representativeness although it is
acknowledged that the sample was nevertheless relatively small. The
interviews were taped.
As suggested by Ritchie and Spencer (1994:176), ‘qualitative data
analysis is essentially about detection, and the tasks of defining,
categorizing, theorizing, explaining, exploring and mapping are
fundamental to the analyst’s role’. Thus, the content analysis method
of qualitative research was used to analyze the interview data. As
pointed out by Neuendorf (2002:15), ‘content analysis summarizes
rather than reports all details concerning the message set.’ As a
result, textual data were summarized and later categorized by island
and sector using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Distinctions were
made and similarities and differences among themes emerged. Berg
16
(1998) suggests a theme is a useful unit of analysis. Therefore, the
analytical technique involved making thematic distinctions from
summarized content. Krippendorff (1980:110) suggests that
obtaining thematic distinctions ‘preserves the richness of textual
interpretations’. The thematic content formed the basis for
examination of the research questions.
5 Results
The interview data are summarized from a case study conducted by
McLeod (2005) on ‘Politics and Tourism in Tobago’. Some
quotations are summarized, other quotations are placed in quotation
marks and the interviewees’ categories are placed in parentheses. A
general overview of the state of tourism development was first
examined and interviewees’ opinions on the link between tourism
policy and tourism development in Tobago were explored.
Thereafter, the tourism development effectiveness of the two
governments was considered and the issue of dual governance and its
impact on tourism policies influencing tourism development was
analyzed.
17
On average, interviewees had seventeen years tourism industry
experience ranging from forty-seven years at most to three years at
least. Generally, they noted that an absence of political will and of
policy instruments such as planning and legislation had affected
tourism development with the result being unplanned tourism
development. The respondents argued that Government should have
a clear mandate as to how the tourism industry should proceed.
While interviewees in Trinidad viewed policies affecting tourism
being related to planning issues, the interviewees in Tobago were
more concerned about the policies benefiting the people (a divergent
view). Over the period 2002 to 2004, tourism’s share of GDP has
almost doubled in Tobago from 27% in 2002 to 46% in 2004.
Employment has increased from 7,000 persons to 15,000 persons
over the same period. As a result, tourism now employs 60% of the
workforce in Tobago (Tobago, Public Sector). Tourism has brought
more opportunities to local people who offer a range of services to
facilitate tourists and several homes have expanded to offer guest
rooms and food and beverage services. One respondent expressed
concern that this will create a “tourist trap” and emphasized the need
for maintaining the ambience of the village community (Tobago,
NGO).
18
The question about main policies influencing tourism development in
Tobago was asked to examine the perceived relationship between
tourism policy and tourism development. In relation to this,
interviewees generally believed that there is no explicitly stated
tourism policy for Tobago. Furthermore, they (Tobago, Public
Sector) argue that tourism policy is not working since there has been
no major private investment in the industry. A legislative initiative
through the Tourism Development Act (TDA) of 2000 possibly
influenced what activity has occurred but there seems to be little
promotion of this Act. One interviewee (Trinidad, Public Sector)
recommended that there is a need for a broad policy encouraging
tourism. Another indicated that the existence of no vision or policy
has resulted in no distinctive feature of tourism development in
Tobago. The ‘Tobago thing seem to be anything; a license to do
anything’ (Tobago, Private Sector). Interviewees stated that the
government has attempted to influence development on the island
through tourism policy. This may be because tourism is seen as
being important in Tobago since there is simply no other economic
driver. One respondent saw that there is no particular policy and that
tourism development is market driven (Tobago, Private Sector).
Another respondent (Tobago, Public Sector) stated that the
overarching tourism policy is one of a commitment to maintaining
19
the integrity of the environment. One respondent (Trinidad, Public
Sector) mentioned that international companies such as TUI are
perhaps more powerful in formulating policy locally.
On the question of the Tobago House of Assembly’s role in the
development and implementation of tourism policy on the island,
many interviewees indicated that the THA is the lead body ensuring
that stakeholders, and in general Tobagonians, benefit from tourism.
The THA’s role is critical since central government do not see
tourism as a priority (Trinidad, Public Sector). As one respondent
articulated, ‘all local government organisations should have direct
responsibility to handle tourism matters … It is not just Tobago, it is
the whole country’ (Trinidad, Public Sector). Additionally, the THA
should facilitate stakeholders and assist with approvals to expedite
investment applications. Notably, one respondent suggested that the
THA can develop policy for tourism in Tobago that does not have to
be synchronized with central government policy (Trinidad, Public
Sector). The basis of this is the differing tourism products. While
some interviewees in Trinidad and Tobago both agree that central
government has a role in the development of tourism policy, since
the country is a twin-island state, there is widespread agreement that
the implementation of tourism policy is the THA’s role. Some
20
interviewees from the Tobago Private Sector strongly advocated the
view that central government should not have a role in the
development of tourism policy on the island of Tobago. The reason
for this relates to self-determination and mistrust. The major problem
affecting the THA’s effectiveness is its dependency on Trinidad for
funds and the associated conditions as to how the funds are used,
because in practice the THA does not have effective autonomy. A
recommendation was made for continued effectiveness by allowing
Tobago to collect its own taxes and being empowered to spend this.
When it comes to central government, some interviewees believe that
the jurisdiction to promote tourism resides in TIDCO (another former
national tourism organization of central government) which fell
under the Ministry of Tourism and those policies of TIDCO and the
THA should be synchronized for effectiveness. There are
perceptions of agency encroachment and personality problems that
may impact upon such synchronization. On the question of the
effectiveness of central government policy actions in promoting
tourism development, interviewees generally noted that central
government has played a minimal role in the development of tourism
in Tobago. Central government’s role has been,
• acting as a body which ratifies and sanctions decisions;
21
• funding tourism though more emphasis is placed on the
petroleum industry and light manufacturing;
• seeking to give Tobago autonomy through the Tobago House
of Assembly Act of 1996;
• passing of the Tourism Development Act of 2000; and no
clear-cut national tourism policy.
Central government’s ineffectiveness was evidenced by statements
like, ‘I don’t think they [central government] are promoting tourism
development (Trinidad, Private Sector); and ‘quite sure that the
majority of central government is not appreciative of value of
tourism because in an oil based economy tourism is played down
(Tobago, Public Sector)’. Respondents believed that Tobago is in
the best position to monitor tourism and that the THA have more of
an idea what they want to do. Nevertheless, the allocation of funds to
tourism projects is not significant. On the part of central
government, respondents stated that central government does things
without consultation and is unsynchronized and as a result there is no
serious, consistent execution. There was a belief that central
government is not motivated to develop tourism since the majority of
GDP does not come from tourism.
22
Conversely, those interviewees who indicated that central
government was effective stated that there was a broad based
collaborative approach; there was more funding and a good and
healthy collaboration between Minister of Tourism and Secretary of
Tourism, the THA. Interviewees also mentioned that tourism only
works when the political party in power is the same in both islands.
On the question of whether the policy actions of the THA are
different from those of central government and whether there are
policy conflicts, interviewees identified that there are conflicts,
• legislative interpretation by the implementers;
• difference of views since THA has consultation with industry
and central government does not;
• emphasis of Trinidad is the oil industry;
• market and economic differences;
• Trinidad giving final approval for investment projects in
Tobago;
• disagreement on areas requiring Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA).
23
An example was given of a former THA administration wanting
small scale community tourism development whereas central
government wanted grand scale development. Moreover, the way
government for the twin-island state is configured brings a measure
of conflict. The Cabinet is responsible for everything in both
Trinidad and Tobago. Therefore, Ministries may not want to come to
terms with the fact that the THA has the authority to undertake
development and administration of certain portfolios; though, having
one political directorate does help to reduce the conflict.
Nevertheless, those interviewees who do not see any policy conflict
identified clearly that central government should be responsible for
marketing and THA product development; the THA should be
allowed to fund projects; there should be an indigenous created
policy that suits Tobago; and, the conflict has to do with prioritizing
rather than policy-making.
Interviewees who agreed that dual governance has affected the
formulation of tourism policy, and thus tourism development, felt
that the main weaknesses were,
• the situation is not a reliable one since there may be different
political parties;
24
• overlapping jurisdiction, blurred roles and responsibilities
resulting in duplication and lack of collaboration;
• distinct geographical entities with actors encroaching in each
others’ domain;
• difference in level of importance of the tourism industry;
• the THA decides while funding comes from Trinidad;
• the intervention of an opposition party making political
objections;
• instead of being co-operative there is conflict and
controversy;
• duality resulting in a lack of accountability;
• Minister having final say, frequent changing of Ministers and
Ministers holding on to ‘own space’;
• institutions set up did not operate to the benefit of the people
of Tobago.
Those interviewees indicating that dual governance is not affecting
tourism development stated that,
• there was representation from the THA advancing the
Assembly’s views;
25
• it should not affect it since Trinidad and Tobago should show
a joint front overseas;
• same political party eases the situation;
• it doesn’t affect it since there is nothing that Tobago does
that Trinidad does not allow;
• dual governance works for Tobago since Tobago is clear on
its ‘bread and butter’ it does not work for other parts of
Trinidad.
In order to resolve the conflict issues of dual governance,
recommendations were made for,
• autonomy;
• clarification of lines of communication;
• sustainable political relationship through federalization of
Tobago to allow the THA to raise and fund own initiatives;
• tourism development should not be left to politics and if and
when a political party changes, there should be maturity to
see the importance of tourism to the economic and social
development of the island.
6 Discussion
26
Overall, interviewees were of the view that dual governance has
affected tourism policy’s influence on tourism development. The
effect of dual governance is evident by the relatively constrained
growth of tourist arrivals in Tobago as compared to other Caribbean
tourism destinations. Interviewees agreed that the THA is effective
in promoting tourism development. However, dependency for funds
from Trinidad is a constraint. On the other hand, central government
has been deemed ineffective in promoting tourism development.
There is seemingly a lack of motivation to develop tourism, perhaps
since oil is the economic driver of Trinidad. As a result, there are
policy conflicts. Such conflict is quelled, however, when the same
political party on both islands is in power. Nevertheless, tourism
policy made in a framework of dual governance does not appear to
have permitted the most effective development of tourism.
Generally, the tourism industry seems to be in an environment that
does not allow for proper policy formulation and action, an issue
addressed by several authors (Hall 1994; Dredge and Jenkins 2003;
Kerr 2003). Evidently, tourism policy is not well-formulated (Edgell
1999; Bramwell and Sharman 1999) in a framework of dual
governance and as a result, tourism development in Tobago has not
been to its fullest potential. In other words, tourism in Tobago has
27
not been on a smooth path of development early in its life cycle
(Butler, 1980). Goals may be set, but these are not achieved since
policies are not well formulated to do so or the strategies adopted are
constrained (Mill and Morrison 1985). Certainly, the Chambers and
Airey (2001) argument, which states that government’s public policy
position impacts tourism development holds. As indicated by
interviewees, the advent of the same political party governing both
islands was seen as affecting tourism development. Thus, oneness of
ideology, with the same political party ruling both islands, has
resulted in a new pattern of tourism development in Tobago.
The Mill & Morrison (1985) model clearly outlines how a tourism
policy framework can influence tourism development. The initial
stage is the identification of the broader needs, which is arguably
done effectively by the government on the ground. Thereafter
policies are developed to achieve these goals. After the policy stage,
strategies are implemented that will affect the tourism product. In
Tobago’s case, the tourism policy process was met with constraints,
which have delayed the achievement of goals. Seemingly, the
phenomenon of dual governance is a plausible explanation. In
addition, based on the argument that industry cannot survive without
government (Kerr 2003) and in particular central government’s
28
motivational stance on developing a tourism industry based on public
policy, over a period of more than fifty years, tourism in Tobago
seemed to have developed slowly. Tourism policies were not well
formulated to affect tourism development in Tobago.
In addition, there is the issue of the Minister of Tourism giving final
approval for projects in Tobago, which relates to planning activity
(planning as an instrument was mentioned by several interviewees).
Ministerial approval of projects in Tobago has been an untenable
situation. The question is whether a central or national planning
platform is necessary. Hall and Jenkins (1995) argue that a central
platform is difficult since groups may not work together as a result of
the reduction in power through collaboration. In light of the need for
planning tourism development (Gunn 1988; Hall 2000), the
development of the Tobago tourism industry based on a localized
focus, rather than a national plan is more practical. As indicated by
the findings of this study, central government will not be motivated
in the formulation and implementation of tourism policy in Tobago
since tourism does not drive the economic environment of central
government based in Trinidad. Thus, it is more effective to
formulate and implement tourism policy at the local level.
According to Dredge and Jenkins (2003a), the state must re-work its
29
policy position and support local and regional organizations.
Tourism development is constrained when responsibilities for
tourism development remain scattered (Church et al. 2000). Thus,
there is need to review the system of governance in a twin-island
state scenario with two different economic drivers, one an oil
industry and the other based on tourism.
7 Conclusion
This study clearly reveals particular circumstances under which
tourism development, based on a policy framework is constrained.
In the case of Tobago, the tourism industry’s development has been
slow as a result of tourism policy not being well formulated and
implemented. While government intervention is necessary to
develop tourism, such intervention becomes challenged by a dual
governance arrangement. Based on the complexity of issues and
interests which form the basis of tourism policy-making, dual
governance complicates matters. This research study argues for
tourism policy-making at the local level, which would be different
from that at the national level, particularly since each island has a
different economic driver.
30
The limitations of this research relate particularly to the fact that it
took place at a time when the same political party had been in power
in both islands for some time. Hence it was not possible to explore
the effects of political divergence in this dual governance structure.
This could be a useful topic for a study in the future. It also happened
to coincide with a period when there was a significant growth in
visitor arrivals although there was no evidence that this was related to
tourism policy changes.
As nations join together, one wonders how policy formulation and
implementation among governments will occur. This research study
contributes to a better understanding of the role of sub-national
government policy actions to influence economic development,
particularly those relating to tourism. Specifically, this study has
contributed to the knowledge on political aspects involved in the
development of the tourism industry in a Caribbean Island State.
Acknowledgements The authors thank Dr. Jonathan Edwards and Professor Roger Vaughan of Bournemouth University, for their helpful suggestions and comments. Special thanks to the 26 interviewees who took time to answer the research questions.
31
References Berg, B.L. (1998), Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, 5th edition, Allyn & Bacon, Boston. Bramwell, B. and Sharman, A. (1999) ‘Collaboration in Local Tourism Policymaking’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp.392-415. Butler, R.W. (1980), ‘The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution; implications for management of resources’, The Canadian Geographer, 24(1), pp.5-12. Caribbean Tourism Organisation (CTO) (2005), Unpublished data from the Annual Tourism Statistical Report, CTO, Barbados. On http://www.onecaribbean.org/information/categorybrowse.php?categoryid=205. Accessed 3.07.07. Central Statistical Office (CSO) (2005), Unpublished data from the Travel and Tourism Statistics, CSO, Trinidad and Tobago. On http://www.cso.gov.tt/statistics/indicators.aspx. Accessed 3.07.07. Chambers, D. and Airey, D. (2001), ‘Tourism Policy in Jamaica: a tale of two governments’ Current Issues in Tourism, 4(2/4), pp.94-120. Church, A., Ball, R., Bull, C., Tyler, D. (2000), ‘Public policy engagement with British tourism: the national, local and the European Union’, Tourism Geographies, 2(3), pp.312-336. Clark, M., Riley, M., Wilkie, E. and Wood, R.C. (1998), Researching and Writing Dissertations in Hospitality and Tourism, Thomson, London. Cooper, C., Fletcher, J., Gilbert, D. and Wanhill, S. (1998), Tourism Principles and Practice, Pearson Education Limited, England. Curtin, S. and Busby, G. (1999), ‘Sustainable Destination Development: the tour operator perspective’, International Journal of Tourism Research, 1 (2) pp. 135-147.
32
Department of Tourism (DOT) (2005), Unpublished data from Tobago Tourism Statistics, DOT, Tobago House of Assembly, Tobago. Dredge, D. and Jenkins, J. (2003a), ‘Destination place identity and regional tourism policy’, Tourism Geographies, 5(4), pp.383-407. Dredge, D. and Jenkins, J. (2003b), ‘Federal-State Relations and Tourism Public Policy, New South Wales, Australia’, Current Issues in Tourism 6(5), pp.415-443. Edgell, D.L. (1999), Tourism Policy: the next Millennium, Vol. 3 Champaign: Sagamore, USA. Fraser, A. (2005), British Broadcasting Corporation, Caribbean news story, http://www.bbc.co.uk/caribbean/news/story/2005/01/050104_tobagoelections-analysis.shtml , Accessed 02.05. Gunn, C.A. (1988), Tourism Planning. 2nd Ed., Taylor & Francis, New York. Hall, C.M. (1994), Tourism and politics: policy, power and place. John Wiley & Sons Limited, England. Hall, C.M. and Jenkins, J.M. (1995), Tourism and Public Policy, Routledge, London. Hall, C.M. (2000), ‘Rethinking Collaboration and Partnership: A Public Policy Perspective’, Bramwell, B. and Lane, B. (Eds.): Tourism Collaboration and Partnerships: Politics, Practice and Sustainability, Channel View Publications, Clevedon, pp.143-158. Jenkins, C.L. (1991), ‘Tourism development strategies’, Bodlender, J. Jefferson, A., Jenkins, C. and Lickorish, L. (Eds.): Developing Tourism Destinations, Policies and Perspectives, Harlow: Longman, pp. 61-77. Jordan, L. (2004), ‘Institutional arrangements for tourism in small twin-island states of the Caribbean’ Duval, D.T. (Ed.): Tourism in the Caribbean: Trends, Development, Prospects, Contemporary Geographies of Leisure, Tourism and Mobility, Routledge, London, pp.99-118.
33
Jordan, L. (2007), ‘Interorganisational Relationships in Small Twin-Island Developing States in the Caribbean – The Role of the Internal Core-Periphery Model: The Case of Trinidad and Tobago’, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.1-32. Kerr, B., Barron, G., and Wood, R.C. (2001), ‘Politics, policy and regional tourism administration: a case examination of Scottish area tourist board funding’, Tourism Management, Vol. 22, Issue 6, pp.649-657. Kerr, W.R. (2003), Tourism Public Policy, and the Strategic Management of Failure. Pergamon, Elsevier Limited, United Kingdom. Krippendorff, K. (1980), Content Analysis – An Introduction to its Methodology. Sage Publications, London. Matthews, H.G. and Richter, L.K. (1991), ‘Political Science and Tourism’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 18, pp.120-135. McLeod, M. T. (2005), Politics and Tourism in Tobago, Thesis (MSc), University of Surrey, United Kingdom. Mill, R.C. and Morrison A.M. (1985), The Tourism System: an introductory text. Prentice-Hall International, London. Neuendorf, K. (2002), The Content Analysis Handbook, Sage, Thousand Oaks, California. Pearce, D. (1989), Tourist Development, Longman Group UK Limited, England. Pearce, D. (1996), ‘Regional tourist organizations in Spain: emergence, policies and consequences’, Tourism Economics, 2(2), pp.119-136. Richter, L.K. (1985), ‘Fragmented politics of tourism’, Tourism Management, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.162-173. Ritchie, B.J.R. and Crouch, G.I. (2003), The Competitive Destination: A Sustainable Tourism Perspective, CAB International, UK.
34
Ritchie, J. and Spencer, L. (1994), ‘Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research’, in Bryman, A. and Burgess, R.G. (Eds.): Analyzing Qualitative Data, Routledge, UK. Sautter, E.T. and Leisen, B. (1999), ‘Managing stakeholders a Tourism-Planning Model’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol 26, Issue 2, pp.312-328. Scott, D. And Usher, R. (1996), Understanding Educational Research, Routledge, London. Sekaran, U. (2003), Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, John Wiley & Sons Inc., USA. Sharpley, R. and Telfer, D.J. (Eds.) (2002), Tourism and Development: Concepts and Issues, Channel View Publications, UK. Trinidad and Tobago Tourism Development Authority (TDA) (1988), Tourism Policy. Unpublished document from the TDA, Trinidad and Tobago. Tyler, D. and Dinan, C. (2001), ‘The Role of Interested Groups in England’s Emerging Tourism Policy Network’, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 4, Issue. 2, pp.210-252. Weaver, D.B. (1981), Tobago: The Spatial Development of a Caribbean Tourist Industry, Wilfrid Laurier University, Canada. Weaver, D. (1998), ‘Peripheries of the periphery: Tourism in Tobago and Barbuda’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 25, Issue 2, pp. 292-313.
35